Damascus presses for reintegration, Washington hesitates, and the SDF confronts its most dangerous moment in a decade
As Damascus announces a 15-day extension of its ceasefire, the clock is ticking for Syria’s Kurdish-led forces. With the United States reportedly reconsidering its military presence and pressure mounting on the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to integrate into the national army, the coming weeks could determine whether Syria edges toward uneasy compromise or plunges back into bloodshed.
The Syrian Defense Ministry has announced the extension of a ceasefire across all areas of the Syrian Army’s operations for a period of 15 days, beginning at 23:00 on January 24. On paper, the move signals restraint after months of escalating clashes. In practice, it represents a narrow window for negotiations that could reshape the balance of power in northern and eastern Syria.
According to officials familiar with the matter, the purpose of the ceasefire is to give the SDF time to decide whether they are willing to integrate into the Syrian Arab Army. If no agreement is reached by the end of the 15-day period, fighting is expected to resume. For many on the ground, that prospect is grim. Estimates suggest that clashes between the SDF and Syrian government forces have already left thousands of fighters from both sides dead, in addition to civilians caught in the crossfire.
The pause comes amid reports that the US is considering a full withdrawal of its roughly 1,000 troops stationed alongside Kurdish forces in Syria.
These troops have not primarily fought side by side with the SDF, but have instead provided crucial intelligence, logistical assistance, and air support. Their presence has long been seen as a deterrent against large-scale attacks on Kurdish-held territories and a key factor in preventing a resurgence of Islamic State (IS).
End of an alliance?
According to reporting, Washington is actively weighing its options, raising fears among Kurdish leaders that a decade-long alliance may be nearing its end.
That alliance dates back to 2015, when Syria was engulfed by war and large swaths of territory had fallen under the control of jihadist groups. At the time, the administration of US President Barack Obama was searching for a reliable local force capable of confronting Islamic State. The establishment of the SDF, a coalition led by Kurdish fighters but including Arab and other minority groups, provided such a partner. US backing proved decisive in rolling back IS and dismantling its territorial “caliphate.”
Now, more than a decade later, that partnership appears increasingly fragile.
Shaikhmous Ahmed, the co-chair of the Office of Displaced and Refugee Affairs in the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, says the possibility of a US withdrawal is “nothing new” and “neither is it surprising.” Ahmed, who oversaw the notorious Al-Hol camp until the SDF’s recent withdrawal from parts of the area, points to recent history as precedent.
During President Donald Trump’s first term in 2019, US forces pulled back as Turkish troops launched an offensive against northern Syria, capturing the cities of Ras al-Ayn and Tal Abyad. That decision, widely criticized at the time, left Kurdish forces scrambling to defend themselves and forced them into uneasy arrangements with Damascus.
“Now, he is doing it again because there are also close relations between Trump and Turkish President Erdogan, as well as the leaders of the Gulf states, foremost among them Mohammed bin Salman,” Ahmed argues. “And since [Syrian] President Ahmad al-Sharaa is supported by Erdogan and also by the Gulf states, unfortunately the US decision came to serve these regimes that do not want there to be democratic regimes in Syria and in the region.”
Not everyone shares Ahmed’s bleak assessment. Abd Issa, a lawyer and researcher specializing in Kurdish affairs and the founder of the Osman Sabri Association, believes a complete American withdrawal remains unlikely.
“First, in my opinion, the United States will not leave the region easily and just walk away. Nor will it leave the Syrian Democratic Forces on their own,” Issa says. “But it may dissolve the Syrian Democratic Forces and replace them with another entity under a new name, such as People’s Protection, for example, or any other designation as a military group that defends the region.”
Issa views US policy through a more transactional lens. “Trump and Tom Barrack [US envoy to the region – ed.] buy and sell in the Middle East in oil, resources, and the like. They are businessmen, not politicians,” he says. “Because the American presidency always comes through corporations or through the heads of major global companies in the US that run the economy secretly or sometimes openly.”
Still, skepticism runs deep among Kurds, shaped by a long history of abandonment by powerful allies. In the 1940s, the Soviet Union withdrew its backing for the short-lived Mahabad Republic, leaving Kurdish leaders to face Iranian forces alone. In 1970, Iran ended its support for Kurdish rebels in Iraq after signing the Algiers Agreement with Baghdad. Several US administrations have also shifted priorities, leaving Kurdish movements exposed to retaliation from regional powers.
No friends but the mountains
As Issa puts it, “Therefore, we Kurds have a historical saying: ‘The Kurds have no friends but the mountains,’ and we will rely on ourselves in confronting dark and jihadi forces, and we will not accept surrender to them. We have support from our people in all parts of Kurdistan and in the diaspora. The Kurds also have friends in the international community.”
Yet self-reliance has limits, especially in a region where power is often defined by air superiority, heavy weaponry, and international legitimacy. Ahmed warns that a US withdrawal could have devastating consequences not only for Kurdish communities, but for Syria and the wider world.
“Of course the most affected will be the Kurds who have been fighting these jihadists for years and now they all come under the umbrella of the Syrian Ministry of Defense,” he says. “I project large waves of displacement from Kurdish areas and towns as a result of the attacks on the region. Also, these jihadists pose a danger and a threat not only to the region but to the international community.”
The concern is not hypothetical. In the past, jihadists who escaped Syria through Türkiye managed to infiltrate European cities, carrying out deadly terrorist attacks. With thousands of suspected IS fighters and their families held in camps and detention centers like Al-Hol, the risk of mass escapes looms large if Kurdish security structures collapse.
US government assessments have previously warned of the enduring threat posed by IS networks and the danger of detainees being released amid instability.
Issa agrees that the stakes are high. “The withdrawal of US forces will have a very negative impact on the region,” he says. “If US forces withdraw, there is a danger of IS and other extremist groups returning, and of Iran and Turkey dominating Syrian interests, in terms of policies practiced for many years through the ideology of the Baath Party and others, at the expense of Syrian interests and Syrian citizens.”
For now, the ceasefire offers a brief respite. But it is also a deadline. The SDF must decide whether integration into the Syrian army offers protection or erodes the autonomy they have built over years of war. Damascus, for its part, appears determined to reassert control, while regional powers watch closely for any opening to expand their influence.
Despite the uncertainty, Ahmed insists there is still hope that Washington’s decision can be reversed.
“A people who supported and stood by the Kurdish people and the Syrian Democratic Forces in fighting IS,” he says.
“The Kurdish people and the American people are bound by a strong friendship, and we hope that the American people will pressure the US administration through Congress, and also pressure the head of the US administration, President Donald Trump, to stop the offensive operations by those factions and to secure the rights of the Kurds in Syria in the Kurdish areas.”
He frames the Kurdish struggle not as a narrow ethnic cause, but as part of a broader fight against extremism. “Kurds are supportive for all peoples, especially in confronting the dark forces spreading today in Syria and Iraq and which may spread in the Middle East region and threaten not only the region but even European countries and America,” Ahmed says.
As the ceasefire clock ticks down, the choices made in Damascus, Washington, and the Kurdish-held territories may reverberate far beyond Syria’s borders. Whether the pause leads to compromise or merely delays another round of violence remains an open, and urgent, question.
Read the full article here